I know, that is a lot of coin. It really shouldn't have got to this point. If the others weren't really interested, they should have dumped their share years ago. I suppose I am just thinking about how I might handle an inheritance situation. I would like to think if I had something given to me by my father, and I wanted to get rid of it, my siblings would get a break on a purchase of it (or given to them....Obviously this is a sale situation).</rosecoloredglasses>

Logged

It's a hot night. The mind races. You think about your knife; the only friend who hasn't betrayed you, the only friend who won't be dead by sun up. Sleep tight, mates, in your quilted Chambray nightshirts.

I know, that is a lot of coin. It really shouldn't have got to this point. If the others weren't really interested, they should have dumped their share years ago. I suppose I am just thinking about how I might handle an inheritance situation. I would like to think if I had something given to me by my father, and I wanted to get rid of it, my siblings would get a break on a purchase of it (or given to them....Obviously this is a sale situation).</rosecoloredglasses>

When my dad's dad passed a few years ago, he left a two-story garage full of shit dating from about 1925 to the present. The kind of stuff you see on Antiques Roadshow, including an ivory-handled hand .38, a model T ford, a '49 plymouth with about 5000 miles on it, just tons of shit. He was a hoarder.

Anyway, there are 5 kids who stand to inherit, pa od, 3 uncles, and an aunt, plus too many grandchildren to number. They were trying to figure out how to deal with all this stuff, and my cousin, who is an auctioneer by profession, offered to value all of it, and then anyone who wanted any particular item would pay the value, anything remaining would be sold, all the money into a pool, divided by five and, voila, everyone gets what they want and what's coming to them.

Except one of my stupid ass, small minded uncles (these people are for the most part hicks, mind you, not because they live in the middle of nowhere, but because they think like absolute rubes) decided that my cousin would undervalue the things his dad and brothers wanted, and overvalue what everyone else wanted. Conflict of interest sort of thing. My poor cousin, who is as honest as they come, who has a kid with Downs and a wife with cancer, was told he couldn't do the job he vounteered to do for free because some of the family thinks he might try to cheat them.

So all that shit still sits up in the two-story garage at the foot of King's mountain, and none of my dad's brothers talk to each other any more.

My poor cousin, who is as honest as they come, who has a kid with Downs and a wife with cancer, was told he couldn't do the job he volunteered to do for free because some of the family thinks he might try to cheat them.

Those are the ones you have to keep an eye on.

You'd be surprised at how many of the locals here are using that exact same Downs & Death song and dance.

"Dreith said I hit Sipe too hard. I hit him as hard as I could. Brian has a chance to go out of bounds and he decides not to. He knows I'm going to hit him. And I do. History."- - - Jack Lambert, after referee Ben Dreith ejected him from a game for knocking out Browns QB Brian Sipe.

I have yet to really look at the details of this situation. I will say though that I'm tired of reading all of the doom and gloom pieces. Gonna have to check it out this weekend before the "Rooney to sell majority interest to the Nazis" editorial hits the newsstands.

"Under our current rules there's no public ownership permitted of a team," he said.

No more than 25 people can own an interest in an NFL team, and the controlling owner must have a 30 percent stake.

"The reason for those rules is for accountability so ... the operation of the team is clearly defined, there's accountability in one person and it makes for more efficient decision-making," Aiello said.

He called the Packers' structure a "historical aberration that's been accepted."

So, the Pack's ownership make-up is accepted, but the Steelers' ownership make-up causes a crisis? I don't think the league gives a shit about the arrangement. I think the issues are:

1. The gambling association.2. Brotherly strife.

Logged

Cleveland: The only NFL city to never play in, or host, a Superbowl. That bears repeating.

I also think the Druckenmiller threat has essentially passed, although some would view a capital infusion less as an invasion than a godsend. Me not being one of them (stinkin' traditionalist). Here's why:

Dan Rooney only needs 8 allies among the owners to vote it down.

If that fails, the county's poison pill to the tune of $281M for Heinz Field costs.

The former has more teeth, esp. with someone of great financial resources, but figure the brothers would push for the upper limit of the $900M - $1.2B estimate to be inclined to sell. I mean, if it's between $750M to Dan and $900M to Stan, they'll find a way to ensure family harmoney and work the middle ground. So, $1.2B x 64% = $768M in outlay for Stan for controlling share. Fine. Add $281M, even if that's prorated by ownership share (64% being $179,840,000), and Stan's buying price just went up about 24%.

-The Steelers for sure stay in the burgh-Rooneys are still the managing partners (Dan & Art still own their share)-No shortage of cash to help sign contracts ESPECIALLY if we ever get to an era of no salary cap